ACL:

http://images.hitfix.com/photos/2361...story_main.jpg

My wife was just commenting on how lame it has become, just like FSU tonight! Muse didn't do much for me either, what ever happened to musicians?

I only watch it for the Jameson comercials...:D

They didn't bother showing up for the second half... blargh. NC State has given us trouble for years no matter how much they suck against other teams.

I just took delivery of my custom guitar amp tonight. :) There has been plenty of music going on in the house, haha. The dog and wife have positioned themselves to the other side of the house due to the volume, haha.

I don't get to do this very often.... How about that Wolfpack!!

I give up on UGA!!!! They have more players in the NFL than any other college program and that is the crap that they present on the field. CMR has to go!!!! Take that aptly named OC with you too. Kudos to the OBC for turning an also ran program around, although I think Lou Holtz got the ball rolling for him. Oh, and why do the UGA cornerbacks have to give a 10 to 15 yard cushion on every play? I could catch a pass with that much cushion.

Ducks offense vs Bama (or Fighting Amish) defense would be interesting.

While the Administration brings out the cavalry with some of the higher ups along with the reps, I will avoid muddling through the weeds with them. I will simply clarify my position with the aid of some quotes from the "5 letters".

From Brakechatter:

While Padre says that the two are mutually exclusive, then denies they are, then says again that they are; maximizing leverage and seizing all available opportunities while tidying up the house and taking care of our pilots safety and security concerns within our committee structure can indeed happen simultaneously. As a former committee member myself, I have been told point blank from Administration leadership that safety and security "are some else's problem". As a line pilot in the pointy end of the airplane, I vehemently disagree with that assertion, and in fact, it is the very foundation on which ALPA was built. To disregard it as "navel lint" is completely unacceptable.

Same holds true with the policy manual. Apparently, it too is regarded as "navel lint" by the powers that be. Rules of engagement exist for a reason. They are there to protect us from, well, exactly what is happening: a small power base deciding unilaterally what is good for the Delta pilots rather than the Delta pilots making that determination. As a Delta captain for some 12+ years, I can unequivocally tell you that should I choose to disregard the rules of the road, also known as the FOM, I will find myself out of a job in quick order. My job is to find the path of success within the bounds of the FOM.

We have things like policy manuals, Constitutions, FOMs, laws, etc in order to define what is right and what is wrong. Deviation is allowed in an emergency. Creating emergencies to allow deviations is unacceptable. While some may call that a political motive, I would argue that it is they who are bringing up politics with "navel lint" comments regarding the rules of engagement.

So, onto pay, work rules and benefits. Allow me another quote from 1 of my "5 letters":

Contract 2012: I did not support the 2012 tentative agreement. While the agreement provided a slightly bigger paycheck, it fell woefully short of the direction given by our pilots, and subsequently, the MEC governing body. Specifically, it did not meet important monetary triggers, scope protections, retirement parameters, and exchanged too many items to the company without fair gain in return. While additional cash is always welcome, we could have done better. Now that C2012 is in place, we must move forward and seek every opportunity for contract improvements and advancements.

This pretty much sums it up. To say that I am not interested in pay, benefits, and work rules is just absolutely incorrect. It is the reason I did not support the TA. Simply put, I feel as if the pilots of a 2 plus billion projected profit company should have done better. Some will talk about productivity while comparing a 9 fleet airline to a 1 fleet airline. We will never be as productive as other airlines who have many less fleet types. Those who measure our success by denigrating other airlines strike me as the same people who need to say, "I'm the captain, that's why". Here is the thing, and I underlined it in my last sentence--it's done. We now move on to the next opportunity, and hopefully glean a bit of wisdom in the ability to step back, decide what went right and what went wrong, and do better next time.

To label this as "navel lint" is a huge disservice to the Delta pilots, and to the history of ALPA, whose roots are etched in safety. If we are so focused on only contractual improvements that we snub our nose at safety, security, and a host of other issues, why even bother with safety and security? Why not just save the money in expenditures and have a handful of MEC Administrators, elected and appointed run the whole show? Why even have LEC representatives if their direction is disregarded? We could certainly save money there as well.

The bottom line, contrary to what you are being told here by the upper powers in the MEC Administration and current representatives, is that ALL candidates have an acute interest in maximizing contractual benefits, and perhaps we disagree as to how to do it. Only a few candidates have talked about some of the other issues, which are causing damage to the foundation of our unity. Words such as "pander" and "naval lint" are divisive in their nature, and I have no interest in the mud slinging. I am not surprised that appointed and elected representatives have shown up to defend their hospitality suites, flight pay loss, ALPA career progression, etc.

Maximum extraction of leverage, communication concerns, committee concerns, and other problems within ALPA can ALL be addressed in a much more satisfactory manner--WHILE following the policy manual.

To use other union failures with BK companies as a measure of our success with a company approaching the 2 billion dollar profit mark is what we might call a red herring.

To say that pay, benefits, and work rules take a back seat with me is simply not true.

I'll make it clear, I wish to see us maximizing leverage in the upward trend of our pay/benefit package, WHILE utilizing our committee structure in a much more beneficial way, WHILE communicating in a more useful and respectful manner with our pilots, WHILE restoring the direction of our union to the line pilot via his or her representation and not by a few elected and appointed officials.

Council 44 voters will decide correct course, and not an anonymous web board.

I hope that clears up any misconceptions about my "agenda".

Gave it some thought. What we should do about it is abide by the process already in place. ALPA is supposed to be a union, looking out for the jobs of its members. This last TA offered us increased pay rates but in accepting them, we gave up work rules.

We still haven’t figured out that Management is not our friend and that they are infinitely better at negotiating than we are. We accept the idea that the pie is only so big and therefore we limit ourselves. AA pilots are currently proving to AMR that the operation is kept on track by pilots. By accepting the visual, we allow ATC to cram enough flights into crowded airports to keep things flowing. By studying systems and by applying experience, we can find work arounds and in some cases fix the problem without taking a delay. We coordinate across divisional boundaries in order to keep the mission aka operation on schedule. We are expected to do more than just what is in the contract. I’m happy to do it because DAL is a great company. However, we don’t do a great job of selling our worth to management in negotiations.

The TA was passed as soon as it left the MEC for MEMRAT. In my short time at Delta, I’ve seen ALPA sales jobs at work. They are impressive. I call them sales jobs, because they accentuate the positive and gloss over negatives, whether real or perceived.

The other thing to remember is to make the job a little better for the guys that follow. Just because we had to walk uphill through the snow to school each morning doesn’t mean we can’t let our kids ride the bus or an SUV. The senior guys should be a little empathetic for the junior guys and the junior guys – me included should remember we work in a seniority based system that rewards longevity over everything else. We have to make sure we look after jobs and not just looking out for ourselves. Trip parking was a great example. Look how many 777 spots were lost because they weren’t using reserves because guys had found a way around the WS limits.

So in short, in answer to your question about what we should do, we should stand up for ourselves and recognize that ALPA has its own agenda that is frequently divergent from ours. That’s ok; we just need to remember it come contract time. For those that say we nay sayers should get involved, remember it’s very hard to affect change from within, too often those attempting to lose track and get assimilated.

Dragon, Good post, well thought out. I don't agree with everything you posted but a good presentation. Remember your fellow Delta pilot is every bit as capable of independent thinking and contract analysis as you are and a majority of them voted for it, to imply otherwise is hypocritical. On the 777 everyday there were 2 or 3 reserves required and anywhere from 12 to 20 available. We had/have many reserves who flew zero to 1 trip a year ! We were way over manned and it had nothing to do with trip swapping which is now gone ( never did it but I know why it was done, pm me if you want details).

Brakechatter this is directed at you too. How can you be so certain that A) Your agenda is the agenda of the majority of Delta Pilots, and B) How do you know that the will of ALPA is incorrect?

I've yet to fly with anyone since MEMRAT who's been unhappy with the contract. Call it a statistical anomaly, but now that its our PWA, the support for it is likely more along the lines of 70/30 than the ratification split.